- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37097 WP No. 5866 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 5866 OF 2025 (GM-CPC) BETWEEN: DENIS PINTO S/O LATE MICHAEL W. PINTO, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/AT 1-116, ELU BAI KODI HOUSE, PADU POST, BONDANTHILA VILLAGE, MANGALURU TALUK - 575 029. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SANATHKUMAR SHETTY K., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. LEO FERNANDES S/O LATE OSWALD FERNANDES, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, R/AT ANU BAI BETTU HOUSE, PADU POST, BONDANTHILA VILLAGE, MANGALURU - 575 029. 2. PIUS FERNANDES S/O LATE OSWALD FERNANDES, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37097 WP No. 5866 of 2025 R/AT ANU BAI BETTU HOUSE, PADU POST, BONDANTHILA VILLAGE, MANGALURU -575 029. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAVISHANKAR SHASTRY, ADV. FOR C/R1) THIS W.P. IS FILED ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER DATED 20.12.2024 PASSED IN M.A.NO.33/2024 ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM AT MANGALURU, DAKSHINA KANNADA VIDE ANNEXURE-A WHEREUNDER THE ORDER PASSED ON I.A.NO.II DATED 12.06.2024 IN O.S.NO.491/2024 ON THE FILE OF III ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MANGALURU, DAKSHINA KANNADA HAS BEEN REVERSED VIDE ANNEXURE-B BY SETTING THE ORDER AT ANNEXURE-A ASIDE. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37097 WP No. 5866 of 2025 ORAL ORDER The petitioner is before this court calling in question an order of the First Appellate Court which upturns the order of the Trial Court which had granted injunction in favour of the petitioner. 2. Heard Sri. Sanathkumar Shetty K, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. Ravishankar Shastry, learned counsel appearing for caveat/respondent No.1. 3. The petitioner is the plaintiff, who institutes a suit in OS.No.491/2024 seeking injunction against the respondents. The concerned Court answering an application filed by the petitioner under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC, grants injunction, that is called in question by the respondents before the First Appellate Court. The concerned Court upturns the order and the petitioner/plaintiff is before this Court on such challenging the said order of the First Appellate Court. The issue is with regard to interference with the property of the petitioner by the alleged interference of the property of the petitioner by respondents. The roadway forms the fulcrum of the lis. The roadway of 15 feet is the only way to reach both - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37097 WP No. 5866 of 2025 the properties. The roadway is alleged to be the road to enter to the properties and that is now on the garb of injunction, the block is the submission of the learned counsel appearing for respondents, which has been taken favorably by the First Appellate Court. 4. This Court while entertaining the petition had granted status quo to be maintained by the parties. Therefore, I deem it appropriate to maintain the status quo, which is directed to be maintained by the parties and direct the concerned Court to close the issue within a time line. In the garb of the maintenance of status quo, it is made clear that no untoward incident should be generated by the petitioner or respondents herein. If the roadway was being used earlier, it shall continue to be used, till the disposal of the suit or the appropriate orders that would be passed by the concerned Court on any application being made by the parties. For the aforesaid reasons, the following : ORDER i) The petition stands dispose. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37097 WP No. 5866 of 2025 ii) The order of status quo obtaining as on today shall continue, till the disposal of this suit. iii) The suit itself shall be disposed within an outer limit of six(6) months from the date of the receipt of a copy of this order. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE PHM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13